Q. How many witches were there in Scotland?A. We have identified a total number of 3,837 people who were
accused of witchcraft in Scotland. 3,212 of these are named and there
are a further 625 unnamed people or groups included in our database.
This is not a complete figure (see How complete is the database?), but
it is probably fairly accurate.

Older accounts of the subject tended to produce much higher
figures, such as 4,500 or 30,000. Sometimes these figures are still
repeated, but they are based on speculation rather than detailed
research. Usually they are given as figures for executions, making
them even more misleading. Similarly, a figure of 9 million witches
executed in Europe is sometimes given, when most scholars agree that
it was about 60,000. These exaggerations are unfortunate. We think
that 3,837 people accused of witchcraft is a lot.

Q. How complete is the database?A. It is as complete as we could make it, but there are
unavoidable gaps. A good deal of evidence is missing, and what
survives is sometimes hard to find. We have 3,212 names of people
accused of witchcraft. There are also 625 records for unnamed people
or groups of unnamed people, making a total of 3,837 cases (including
some groups of unknown size). This is probably most of the cases, but
it is unlikely to be all of them.

There is also the question of how much information survives on each
case. For most cases, we know that the accused witch existed, but not
much more. In particular, we do not know whether these witches were
executed (see How many witches were executed?). In most cases we have
a record that a trial was authorised, but we do not know for certain
whether the trial took place or what its outcome was. The number of
those executed was probably much higher than those for whom we have
definite records of their execution.

On the other hand, there are some very detailed cases which
provide a great deal of information. There is information about the
accused witches themselves, about their families and neighbours, about
their working lives, and about the beliefs and practices that led to
accusations of witchcraft. Early modern society's belief system
encompassed ideas about religion and the supernatural, including the
Devil, fairies and other spirits. It was used to explain misfortune
and also as a means to rectify adversity. To find out about this, we
don't need to have surviving evidence on every single case; we just
need enough evidence to be able to see what was typical. The
information that we have recorded will enable you to search the
material for your own purposes and to build a more detailed picture of
life in early modern Scotland.

Q. How many witches were executed?A. It's hard to tell, but certainly not all. Of the 3,212
named individuals, we know the sentence of a trial in only 305 cases.
205 of these were to be executed, 52 were acquitted, 27 were banished,
11 were declared fugitive, 6 were excommunicated, 2 were put to the
horn (outlawed), 1 person was to be kept in prison and 1 person was to
be publicly humiliated. In addition, a further 98 were recorded as
having fled from prosecution. This seems to suggest that 67%,
two-thirds, were executed.

But this figure is probably not very accurate. It is based on
only 305 cases—less than a tenth of the 3,212 people known to
have been accused. The question is whether the 305 cases were typical,
and in two ways they were not. Firstly, most of them come from trials
in the central justiciary court (see What courts were involved?). This
probably acquitted a higher proportion of witches than local
courts—and most trials were in local courts. Secondly, however,
our 3,212 people include a number whom we found being investigated by
the church authorities. Probably some of these went on to receive a
criminal trial, and may then have been executed; but others' cases
were probably dropped before they came to trial. The first of the
problems would suggest that the overall execution rate was higher than
67%; the second problem would suggest that it was lower. That does not
mean that the figure of 67% is correct; it means that there is a good
deal of uncertainty about it.

Q. How many were women?A. Most, but not all: 84% were women and 15% men. The sex is
not known for 1% of those accused.

Q. Were they old?A. Based on the age of the accused that we were able to
record:

7% were aged under 20
8% were between 20 and 30
22% were between 30 and 40
22% were between 40 and 50
31% were between 50 and 60
7% were between 60 and 70
4% were over 70.

Thus about half were over 40 when accused, at a time when life
expectancies were considerably lower than they are today. The age of
the majority of people accused is not known.

It should also be remembered that many 'witches' were defined as
witches by their neighbours, through a process of gossip and
quarrelling. Witches were believed to be malicious and vengeful. If
someone suffered a misfortune after a quarrel, they might conclude
that the other person had bewitched them in revenge. In trials
involving neighbours' testimony, the accused witch is often seen to
have lived with their reputation for a long time—twenty or even
forty years. These witches were old when they were tried, but they
were younger when they first acquired their reputation.

Q. Were they widowed?A. It's hard to say. Of those women whose marital status was
recorded the majority were married—78%. Those who were recorded
as widowed accounted for 19%. But marital status is unknown for the
great majority of those accused. The problem is that a married woman
would be more likely to have her status recorded, because she had a
husband with an interest in his wife's trial. An unmarried woman or
widow did not need to have her marital status mentioned. So these
figures are probably untypical, and at present we don't know how
untypical.

Q. Where did they come from?A. 32% of named accused witches came from the Lothians.
Strathclyde and the west produced 14%, and 12% were from Fife, 9% from
the Borders, Grampian including Aberdeen produced 7%, Tayside and the
Highlands and Islands produced 6% each, 5% were from Caithness, Orkney
and Shetland, and 2% from Central region. The remainder came from
unknown locations. The population of early modern Scotland was more
evenly distributed than it is today, so the preponderance of witches
in Scotland's central belt is really striking. The top county for
witch-hunting was Haddingtonshire (East Lothian).

Q. When were the prosecutions?A. The Witchcraft Act was in force between 1563 and 1736.
Between these years there were five episodes that stand out as periods
of high level accusation and prosecution of witches: 1590-1, 1597,
1628-30, 1649 and 1661-2. These episodes of high level accusation were
not national but were the result of a number of local or regional
activities, particularly the Lothians. Prosecution in other parts of
Scotland was more varied and many areas follow a very different
chronological pattern to that of the Lothians.

Q. Were the witches midwives or healers?A. Not usually. We have recorded 9 individuals whose
occupation was recorded as being a midwife, and for 10 people
midwifery practices were included as part of the accusations of
witchcraft levelled against them. This is a tiny percentage of the
overall total. Folk healing was more common and featured in the
witchcraft accusations of 141 people—about 4%. Even so, it was
not something that the typical witch seems to have engaged
in—though the beliefs that underpinned folk healing were closely
related to witchcraft beliefs. If magic could be used to heal, it
could also be used to harm.

Q. Were they poor?A. No, at least not by contemporary standards. It is difficult
to classify early modern people into socio-economic categories, but of
those individuals whose status was indicated the majority fell into
the middle range—64%. The total of those who came from lower
socio-economic categories—lower, very poor and
landless—accounted for 29%, with upper, lairds and nobility
accounting for 6%. We do not know this information for the majority of
those accused, but these figures may be typical.

Q. How does Scotland compare to England and the rest of Europe?A. Comparisons are interesting but at the same time can tell
us relatively little. They are also influenced by which part of Europe
is used as a comparison. A gender division of 85% women and 15% men is
seen in most other parts of Europe, but in areas like Estonia, Russia
and Finland the percentage of men accused is as high and in some areas
higher than of women. In Iceland the percentage of men executed was as
high as 90%. It is possible therefore to say that Scotland is quite
similar to the rest of mainland Europe, but France and many parts of
Germany, where many of the European witch trials occurred, were
politically, religiously and culturally quite different from Scotland.
The Scandinavian comparison should not be ignored even if it
demonstrates very different patterns.

Q. Were the witches tortured?A. Yes. Torture was used to exact confessions—though we
don't know how often, as the records that survive in most cases aren't
the kinds that mention it. In theory, torture was only to be used with
the permission of the state; however in reality it would seem that
torture was frequently used without any official permission. It was
not until after the 1661-2 period of high level witch accusations that
the privy council issued a declaration that torture was only to be
used with its permission. Despite this, torture continued to be used
in many cases, even as late as 1704.

Q. What kinds of torture were used?A. The most common form was sleep deprivation—a very
effective way of obtaining confessions, because it leads to
hallucination. Before 1662 this was rarely regarded officially as
torture at all. It was usually done by local authorities—burgh
bailies, or elders of the kirk session—in order to get the
evidence that they needed before they went to the privy council to
obtain a commission to hold a criminal trial.

Occasionally, physical tortures were used—particularly
in the 'North Berwick' witchcraft panic of 1590-1, where the witches
were accused of treason against King James VI. The pamphlet Newes
from Scotland (1591), from which our illustration comes, describes
these tortures with relish. But they were unusual.

Q. What about the swimming test?A. This was hardly ever used in Scotland, though it was in some
other countries. It's often said that witches were detected by
dropping them in water. If they floated they were guilty; if they sank
they were innocent—but they drowned. This is a misunderstanding,
since ropes were tied to them to pull them out of the water. In
Scotland the swimming test was used for an unknown number of suspects
in 1597, but it seems to have been discredited on that occasion, and
we have found no evidence that it was ever used again.

Q. What evidence was used in the trials?A. Four main types were used.

Confession evidence, often extracted under torture. Typically if a
suspect was interrogated they would be expected to confess to making a
pact with the Devil and to harming their neighbours by maleficent
witchcraft, though one or other of these was often omitted.

Neighbours' testimony. Statements by neighbours usually ignored the
Devil. They usually described quarrels with the suspect followed by
misfortune they had suffered.

Other witches' testimony. When witches were interrogated they were
sometimes asked about their accomplices. The people they named could
then be arrested and interrogated. This was an effective way of
increasing the numbers of suspects; it seems mainly to have happened
during short periods of intense witch-hunting.

The Devil's mark. The Devil was believed to mark his followers at
the time when they made a pact with him, as a parody of Christian
baptism. A physical search of the suspect's body could find this
mark—either a visible bodily blemish or an insensitive spot. The
insensitive spot was discovered by pricking with pins, sometimes by
the interrogators themselves and sometimes by itinerant professional
witch-prickers (of whom about 10 are known to have acted in Scotland).

Q. Was it a rapid process from accusation to execution?A. Not necessarily. The length of time between initial
accusation, or denunciation, to trial and possible execution was not
set and could vary greatly. Some individuals appear to have had a long
reputation before they were investigated or may have been in trouble
with the church authorities a number of times before they were
investigated for witchcraft. In some cases there may have been some
investigation decades before the official date of prosecution. On the
other hand some cases appear to have been processed very quickly.
There were also numerous acquittals, as well as other occasional
outcomes—escape from prison, or death in prison either from
natural causes or from suicide.

Q. What courts were involved?A. Several types of court, often with their own specialised
roles. More than one could be involved in the same case at different
stages.

Local church courts (kirk sessions and presbyteries). These were
often the bodies to which people complained about witchcraft; they
interrogated suspects and gathered evidence from neighbours. But they
had no criminal jurisdiction; they couldn't execute witches. So they
had to pass the case on to one of the following:

Privy council, committee of estates or parliament. These were
central bodies that didn't hold trials themselves, but they did issue
commissions (known as 'commissions of justiciary') authorising people
to hold trials. See no. 6 below.

Court of justiciary. The highest criminal court, held usually in
Edinburgh. Tried numerous witches.

Circuit courts. Travelling versions of the court of justiciary that
occasionally visited the localities. Often tried witches when they
were held.

Local criminal courts held under commissions of justiciary (issued
by the bodies listed in 2 above). These were usually ad hoc
courts convened to try just one person for one crime. Most Scottish
witches were tried in such courts. Few of their records survive,
though we do usually have a record of the issue of a commission.

Q. How were witches executed?A. Those convicted were almost always strangled at the stake
and then their dead body was burned. We have records of 141 sentences
specifying an execution method; 120 were for strangling and burning.
Of the 17 sentenced simply to burning, many may have been strangled
first—though a very small number are known to have been burned
alive. In the sentences of beheading (3) and hanging (1), crimes other
than witchcraft were also involved.

Q. Who profited financially from witch-hunting?A. Hardly anyone. Witches' goods were often confiscated by the
courts, but most witches were too poor for this to be lucrative; only
rarely would it cover the cost of pre-trial imprisonment, obtaining a
trial commission, holding a court and organising an execution.
Attempts to organise the prosecution of richer suspects were sometimes
mounted, but these usually failed. The main people to benefit
financially from witch-hunting were low-level official
servants—jailers and executioners—plus a few
witch-prickers. By contrast, most of the people involved in
witch-hunting gave up time and money to do it. They did so because
they believed in what they were doing. Witches were hated and feared,
and it was important to eliminate them.

Q. Did witches meet in groups of thirteen?A. No. There are some cases where people described meeting in
groups and indulging in communal rituals. However, the numbers
involved varied greatly: from 2 to over 100, and in one case 2,400.
Moreover, most of these meetings were probably invented by suspects
under heavy pressure to confess. The stereotype coven of 13 is a
modern invention. The idea derives largely from the confession of a
Scottish witch, Isobel Gowdie, but there are so many fantastic
elements in this confession that it cannot be taken as a literal
account of what she had done.

Q. Did they worship the Devil?A. No, but they were thought to do so. Descriptions of meeting
the Devil and entering a relationship or pact with him feature in the
majority of our records that have detailed information. This
relationship with the Devil was crucial to the church and the law in
proving someone was guilty of witchcraft. 90% of those whose records
show demonic features were women. Many people were tortured into
confessing to Devil-worship. We have not seen any evidence of an
organised witchcraft cult.

Q. Did they have drug-induced hallucinations?A. No. Television has recently popularised the dubious idea
that the symptoms of demonic possession were really ergotism—a
disease caused by eating rye contaminated by the ergot fungus. Those
afflicted accused others of 'bewitching' them, thus causing witch
hunts. The theory of ergotism was originally developed to explain the
witchcraft panic of 1692 in Salem, Massachusetts; it has largely been
discredited there, and has had little success anywhere else. There is
certainly no evidence for it in Scotland, where very little rye was
eaten.

Q. What did witches look like?A. Some contemporary Continental woodcuts show so-called
witches with strange or grotesque appearances, but in reality there is
little evidence for what those accused of witchcraft looked like or
wore. Probably they were much the same as everyone else. Our
illustration shows witches wearing the normal dress of the period.

Q. Did they fly on broomsticks and own cats?A. There are a few descriptions of accused witches shape shifting,
mostly as animals or some form of apparition, and sometimes they were
said to have flown. However, in Scotland they did not claim to use
broomsticks—this is a Continental idea.

Familiars—particularly in the form of cats—are another
feature commonly associated with witches today. However, at the time,
familiars were mainly found in England. There are only 9 cases where
we have identified what could categorically be defined as a familiar,
so this does not seem to have been an important aspect of Scottish
witchcraft.

Q. How did witch-hunting come to an end?A. The lawyers in charge of the central courts gradually
became less convinced that the usual kinds of evidence could prove
guilt. The validity of confessions made under torture was questioned,
and pricking for the Devil's mark came to be seen as fraudulent.
During some of the major panics, notably in 1661-2, there were
miscarriages of justice which led to tightening up of procedures.
After the Glorious Revolution of 1689 the state became more secular
and no longer needed to prove its godliness by executing witches. A
trickle of local prosecutions continued—the last was in 1727.
The Scottish Witchcraft Act was repealed in 1736 when the British
Parliament decided to repeal the parallel English act. The 1736 Act
abolished the crime of witchcraft and replaced it by a new crime of
'pretended witchcraft' with a maximum penalty of one year's
imprisonment.

Q. This is fascinating, where can I find out more?A. This 'Introduction' has given some idea of the kind of
information you can find within the database; check it out for
yourself. But the database won't tell you everything, and this project
isn't in a position to answer enquiries. At this point, you probably
need to read a book. The Internet is full of poor-quality and
downright misleading information on witchcraft, whereas there are some
really good books. For these, see our Further Reading section. We do
have some Links to other websites, but most of these tell you about
books.

Survey of Scottish Witchcraft,
Scottish History, School of History and Classics,
The University of Edinburgh,
17 Buccleuch Place,
Edinburgh, EH8 9LN